Features
Clean Sri Lanka and Noise Pollution (Part I)
by (Dr) Jayampathy Wickramaratne,
President’s Counsel
One area of focus of the ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ programme, initiated by the new government, that has enthused the people at large is the drive to clean the environment. People affected by intense noise hope that cleaning the environment will not be limited to keeping public spaces clean but will also address the issue of noise pollution. This is evident from letters to newspapers and social media posts calling upon the authorities to deal with noise pollution from varied sources, such as entertainment, places of religious worship, vehicular traffic, construction and industrial activities as part of ‘Clean Sri Lanka’.
I write this piece not only as one having an interest in fundamental rights but also as a victim of noise pollution. In the locality where I live, off Rajagiriya, residents have for years been subjected to intense noise forced upon them, mainly by music but also by fireworks, emanating from events conducted on the premises of a government-owned institution. Complaints to the institution, as well as to the Police, bore no results. I refrain from naming the institution as the matter is under investigation by the Human Rights Commission, and the new management of the institution has promised us that remedial measures will be taken.
While the ‘Clean Sri Lanka’ programme was in full swing, a group of tourists, participating in a musical event in the Weligama area, had objected vociferously to the Police prohibiting the use of loudspeakers after 10 p.m. when the period for which a permit had been issued ran out. One female tourist is heard, in a video of the incident, saying that not allowing the use of loudspeakers will adversely affect tourism.
Reacting to the incident, two government spokespersons said that the present government cannot be blamed as the Police were only giving effect to a judgment of the Supreme Court. Not stopping at that, they said that steps would be taken to have the judgment revised. It might interest readers to know that the then Deputy Minister of Tourism, Diana Gamage, made a similar statement in October 2022.
Supreme Court on noise pollution, Ashik v. Bandula
The judgment referred to is Ashik v. Bandula and others, reported in [2007] 1 Sri Lanka Law Reports on page 191, which was widely welcomed. The case commenced as a fundamental rights application by the trustees of a mosque in Weligama against the Police for refusing a loudspeaker permit. The Police contended that residents in the area had complained of noise pollution due to the excessive use of the loudspeakers by three mosques. The Supreme Court noted that the application raised fundamental issues with regard to sound pollution and standards that the Central Environmental Authority (CEA) should enforce. The CEA was accordingly added as a party. Environmental Foundation Limited was permitted to intervene. The court proceeded with the case as being of public interest.
Noting that our country has probably the oldest jurisprudential tradition of a secular approach in dealing with a public nuisance, the Court referred to the 1895 case of Marshall v. Gunaratne Unnanse where the Supreme Court upheld that conviction of the principal trustee of a Buddhist Vihara in Colombo who was charged under the then applicable section 90 of the Police Ordinance for creating noise in the night and disturbing the neighbourhood.
The Supreme Court referred to Re Noise Pollution, a celebrated case decided by the Indian Supreme Court, noting that the latter Court had firmly rejected the contention that there is a fundamental right to make noise associated with the freedom of speech and expression. The Chief Justice of India delved into the etymology of the term “Noise” and noted that it is derived from the Latin word “Nausea”, defined as unwanted sound, a potential hazard to health and communication dumped into the environment without regard to the adverse effect it may have on unwilling ears.
Chief Justice Lahoti continued: “Noise is more than just a nuisance. It constitutes a real and present danger to people’s health. Day and night, at home, at work, and at play, noise can produce serious physical and psClean Sri Lanka and Noise Pollution (Part I)ychological stress. No one is immune to this
stress. Though we seem to adjust to noise by ignoring it, the ear, in fact, never closes and the body still responds —sometimes with extreme tension, as to a strange sound in the night. … Noise is a type of atmospheric pollution. It is a shadowy public enemy whose growing menace has increased in the modern age of industrialisation and technological advancement. … Nobody can claim the fundamental right to create noise by amplifying the sound of his speech with the help of loudspeakers. While one has a right to speech, and others have a right to listen or decline to listen. Nobody can be compelled to listen and nobody can claim that he has a right to make his voice trespass into the ears or mind of others. Nobody can indulge in aural aggression.”
The Sri Lankan Supreme Court held that there was no dispute that people have been denied equal protection of the law by the failure of the executive to establish by way of regulations an effective legal regime as mandated by the National Environmental Act to safeguard the public from the harmful effects of noise pollution. The facts also reveal that there are no guidelines for the effective implementation of the applicable provisions of law so as to provide to the people equal protection of the law guaranteed by Article 12(1) of the Constitution. Accordingly, the Court considered it to be just and equitable in the circumstances of the case to make the following directions:
(i) That the emission of noise by the use of amplifiers, loudspeakers or other equipment or appliances which causes annoyance to the public or to the people in general who dwell or occupy property in the vicinity be considered a public nuisance in terms of section 261 of the Penal Code and that the Police should entertain complaints and take appropriate action for the abatement of such public nuisance;
(ii) That all permits issued by the Police under section 80(1) of the Police Ordinance shall cease to be effective forthwith;
(iii) That no permits shall be issued in terms of section 80(1) of the Police Ordinance for the use of loudspeakers and other instruments for the amplification of noise as specified in that section covering the period 10 p.m. (night) to 6 a.m. (morning). Such permits may be issued for special religious functions and other special events only after ascertaining the views of persons who occupy land premises in the vicinity, a record of such matters to be maintained and the grant of any such permit shall be forthwith reported to the nearest Magistrate Court;
(iv) That in respect of the hours from 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m., permits may be issued for limited periods of time for specific purposes subject to the strict condition that the noise emitted from such amplifier or loudspeaker or equipment does not extend beyond the precincts of the particular premises.
(v) Where a permit is issued in terms of section 80(1) as provided in direction (iii) and (iv) sufficient number of Police Officers should be designated and posted to the particular place of use to ensure that the conditions imposed are strictly complied with;
(vi) That the Police will make special arrangements to entertain any complaint of a member of the public against any person guilty of an offence of public nuisance as provided in section 261 of the Penal Code or of using any loudspeaker, amplifier or other instrument as provided in section 80 of the Police Ordinance contrary to any of these directions and take immediate steps to investigate the matter and warn such person against a continuance of such conduct. If the conduct is continued after that warning to seize and detain the equipment as provided in section 80(4) of the Police Ordinance and to report the matter to the Registrar of this Court.
The Inspector General of Police was directed to submit a report to the Court as to the action taken on the judgment. IGP’s Circular No. 2031/2007 and Crime Circular 17/2007 were issued in conformity with the judgment. A few years later, following representations made mainly by artistes to President Mahinda Rajapakse, the State requested the Supreme Court to extend the time period of permits during weekends. This request was granted.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court directed that musical and cultural shows should be brought to an end at 1.00 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays and 12.30 a.m. on Sundays. What is important to note is that no change was made to the strict condition made by the Court that noise emitted from an amplifier, loudspeaker or equipment should not extend beyond the precincts of the particular premises.
Southern hoteliers protest relaxing noise laws
The government’s response to a small group of tourists wanting to make merry, unmindful of the rights of the residents of the area, was clearly a knee-jerk reaction. Its spokespersons went to the extent of adding that not permitting loudspeakers till late would adversely affect the tourist industry.
These responses triggered an immediate backlash from citizens concerned with the environment, especially those affected by noise pollution. The Facebook group National Coalition Against Noise Pollution (Shabda Dooshanayata Erehi Jathika Ekamuthuva — type in Sinhala fonts to visit the page) is at the forefront.
The authorities may not have expected opposition from the tourist industry itself. At a media briefing in Galle on 27 January, the Southern Province Tourist Hoteliers Association said that tourists vehemently oppose intense noise. There have been instances of tourists demanding that room charges be paid back and moving out when unable to bear the noise. “Tourists come to Sri Lanka to enjoy the beaches, wildlife and places of historical interest in a relaxing environment. Those who visit discos are drug users. It is they who want noise, not genuine tourists,” the Association explained. A hotel owner from Unawatuna, who had been in the business for 20 years, said that his clients had asked for their money back and left the hotel when disturbed by the intense noise from discos in the neighbourhood. If discos are to be operated, the halls must be constructed so as not to let out sound, he explained —the same condition that our Supreme Court had imposed. A German national whose husband is in the tourist trade in Sri Lanka expressed similar sentiments and blamed Sri Lankan authorities, including the Police, for turning a deaf ear to tourists’ complaints. That tourists want discos and musical shows at night is a misconception, she added. (To be concluded).
Features
Trump’s tariffs, AKD’s gazette and Sri Lanka’s diplomatic slumber
“We are rather respectable in Colombo. We go to bed fairly early, and we remain there till morning. “
According to Sri Lanka’s diplomatic folklore, the late S.W. R. D. Bandaranaike uttered these words while explaining the reasons for Sri Lanka’s abstention on the UN resolution condemning the Soviet invasion of Hungary. Apparently, SWRD’s foreign ministry officials were asleep at home when the diplomatic cable seeking instructions was received from New York. In those days, there were no cell phones, Internet, or even fax or telex machines. The diplomatic cables were sent through post offices. Decoding them was a slow and time-consuming process. Thus, the government could not provide appropriate instructions to our mission in New York in time, and the Sri Lankan delegation abstained on that sensitive UN vote.
Sri Lanka’s Absence from Section 301 Consultations
But then, how does one explain Sri Lanka’s absence from the crucial bilateral consultation held in Washington by the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) during March-April on “Forced Labour” under the Section 301 of the US Trade Act of 1974? Didn’t our foreign and trade ministries send appropriate instructions to Washington in time? Even if the instructions from the foreign ministry were transmitted to our embassy in Washington by pigeon carriers, there was enough time for Sri Lanka to participate in those meetings.
In March, the USTR initiated these 301 investigations on 60 trading partners, and invited all of them for confidential consultations. Out of the 60, 46 participated in these consultations. Sri Lanka was not one of them. Other countries that didn’t participate in these consultations included China, Russia, and Venezuela! In addition to that, the Section 301 Committee conducted a public hearing with interested parties on April 28 and 29. Washington-based diplomats, representatives from few trade ministries as well as representatives from many foreign trade associations and chambers participated in these hearings. Sri Lanka was once again conspicuously absent.
As a result, when the USTR published the proposed forced labour tariffs on June 2nd, Sri Lanka ended up with a 12.5% duty. Pakistani and Indonesian diplomats participated in these consultations and took appropriate follow-up measures, and managed to enter the 10% duty category. As even a threat of a modest tariff hike could disrupt supply chains and reduce competitiveness, particularly in an industry such as garments, I discussed this issue on 15 June and underscored the importance of Sri Lanka’s participation at the next hearing, which was scheduled to be held from July 7th .
Awakening from Diplomatic Slumber and AKD’s Gazette
Fortunately, Sri Lanka finally awoke from weeks of diplomatic slumber, and Ambassador Mahinda Samarasinghe participated in the public hearing on 9 July, and promised, “…. · We have agreed to the text in our negotiations with the USTR on forced labour, …. The gazette as we speak is being printed and I’m getting the gazette tomorrow morning, and the gazette will be shared with USTR as I get it“.
As promised, President Anura Kumara Dissanayake issued a gazette on 10 July banning the imports of goods produced by forced labour. These new regulations are very similar to what Pakistan and Indonesia enacted in April, after their consultations with USTR in March. Why couldn’t we do it in April? Why did we wait till the very last minute?
Challenges ahead
“War is too important to be left to generals alone,” is a famous saying attributed to former French Premier Georges Clemenceau. Similarly, monitoring our main markets is too important to be left to diplomats alone. The United States is the largest single-country market for Sri Lanka. Therefore, Sri Lankan trade chambers and associations should become more proactive in these markets and participate in these events. For example, the chairman of the Pakistani apparel exporters association participated in the April hearings. Similarly, representatives from the Indian Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority, the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, the Confederation of Indian Industry, and Reliance Industries also participated in July hearings. At an event where each speaker is given only five minutes (strictly enforced), having a number of speakers from a country is an advantage. The presence of industry representatives in these kinds of events also help them understand the market dynamics and the future challenges. This is important, particularly because there will be many more challenges with Trump’s tariffs.
With the gazette issued on 10 July, Sri Lanka has imposed a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labour. Now, the challenge will be to effectively enforce the prohibition. And what are the goods produced with forced labour? The USTR list only focuses on aluminum, cotton, electronics, lithium-ion batteries, rice, and tobacco. However, according to the U.S. Department of Labour, the list is much longer. Hence, this list may change continuously during the next two years and tariffs may fluctuate once again.
So, this is definitely not the time to slumber.
(The writer, a retired public servant, can be reached at senadhiragomi@gmail.com)
by Gomi Senadhira ✍️
Features
Tales of Mystery and Suspense 10 Casino for Sale
After the overwhelming grotesquerie of J K Rowling’s latest Cormoran Strike novel (written, I should have noted, as the others were, under the pseudonym Robert Galbraith), I thought I should return to the world of fun, and also a much shorter description since this thriller moves quickly without the layers of detail that Rowling engages in.
I then move to the second comic thriller by Caryl Brahms and S J Simon. This, their second story to feature Vladimir Stroganoff and Adam Quill, was Casino for Sale, as lunatic a romp as the first, though without the emphasis on the ballet that characterized A Bullet in the Ballet.
This one begins with the impresario Stroganoff buying a casino cheap from Baron Sam de Rabinovich, only to find that it was a rundown place, not the grand casino of La Bazouche, a resort on the Frenc+h Riviera, as he had initially thought. The grand one belonged to Lord Buttonhooke, and Stroganoff could not compete, until he thought of bringing the Ballet Stroganoff to the casino – which of course leads to Buttonhooke deciding to have ballet performances in his Casino too.
Stroganoff invites Quill to visit him, which Quill decides to do since he has left Scotland Yard, having come into a legacy. No one believes this, and he has to face questions as to what he did to have been sacked, with sympathy for having been found out.
The day he arrives in La Bazouche there is a murder, of a vitriolic critic called Citrolo, in Stroganoff’s office. He had been going to write a damning review of the opening night of the ballet and Stroganoff, when he realizes Citrolo cannot be swayed, drugs him and dictates the review himself to the papers. He leaves Citrolo sleeping and finds him shot the next morning, whereupon he decides to muddy the waters and leave a suicide note and lots of other murder weapons. So much overkill, as it were, of course ensures that he is arrested.
But the excitable French detective who makes the arrest follows up his suggestion that Buttonhooke was also involved, and so the two casino owners find themselves in cells next door to each other, with the detective Gustave quite happy to provide creature comforts for a fee.
Quill decides he must investigate, and finds Gustave most cooperative, since he has a laid back attitude to work. So it is Quill that finds a notebook which makes it clear Citrolo is an accomplished blackmailer, and that there are lots of possible murderers, including Stroganoff’s croupier, who was crooked, Rabinovich, who was now working for Buttonhooke, a confidence trickster called Kurt Kukumber, whose prospectus for a dud gold mine was found in the office and Prince Alexis Artishok who was engaged in a deal to buy diamonds from the ballerina Dyra Dyrakova.
Stroganoff had been trying to get Dyrakova to dance for him, but having done so previously she had refused. But then to Stroganoff’s chagrin she agreed to dance for Buttonhooke. The clearly crooked Artishok had told Buttonhooke’s mistress Sadie Souse, who was not very bright, that Dyrakova possessed diamonds she was willing to sell cheap, and Sadie was determined to have them.
Quill meanwhile finds out that there was a secret passage to Stroganoff’s office, the obvious solution to what had begun as a locked room mystery, and that this was known by almost everyone apart from Stroganoff himself. And then Rabinovich is murdered, just after Gustave had released his two original suspects, leading him to blame Quill for having insisted on that and thus allowing them to kill again.
Soon afterwards Dyrakova arrives, and the town is full of posters announcing that she will appear in the casinos, elaborate posters for either one, since Stroganoff is determined that she will dance for him, and if she does not come willingly, he has devised a scheme to make her do so unwillingly. So, though Buttonhooke has her taken off to his yacht immediately she arrives at the station, Quill along with Arenskaya gets her into a launch and to Stroganoff’s casino, where she performs to tumultuous applause, not knowing for whom she is dancing.
When Quill asked her about the diamonds, she said she had sold them long ago, and that gave Quill the solution to the mystery. Rabinovich had known about this, and Artishok had killed him to prevent Sadie learning it from him, he had killed Citrolo who had recognized him for an accomplished card sharper, not a Russian prince at all. But before he is arrested, he gets away in a boat, and the police launch that pursues him is on the point of catching him up when it runs out of petrol.
Again, lots of excitement, and entertaining references – Gustave grows marrows – and if not quite as brilliant as its predecessor, Casino was certainly a delightful read.
Features
The challenge of being positive about SAARC
It was a few years back that a former President of Sri Lanka took it on himself to pronounce SAARC ‘dead’. Since then there have been other sections of Sri Lankan opinion that have joined the critics of SAARC and taken the solemn stance that SAARC has indeed died what may be called a natural death.
Their fatalism is understandable. SAARC has failed to meet at heads of government or state level for the past several years to take the SAARC process notably forward. Regional cooperation has more or less been only an appealing idea. No substantive concrete projects have taken off to make the idea a hard reality. ‘Inner paralysis’ seems to be SAARC’s lot. Hence the fatalism in these circles.
However, being one of the worst cash-strapped regions of the world and a teemingly populated one with people virtually left to their devices, what choices do the ‘SAARC Eight’ have other than to try their best to band together and continue with their cooperation efforts, however small they may be?
There is no escaping the mounting debt trap for many of these countries and bankrupt Sri Lanka is a glaring example, but ‘throwing in the towel’ and abandoning themselves entirely to the diktats of the strongest economies and their agencies will prove a ‘living death’ for many countries in the SAARC fold.
The gains may be meagre but giving-up on SAARC cooperation in full would prove self-defeating for the organization and South Asia. Right now, the collective intention ought to be to salvage what the region could from the tenuous cooperative efforts. Moreover, such initiatives could go some distance to generate a degree of goodwill among the Eight and help in sustaining a dialogue process.
Given this backdrop it proved ‘a stich in time’ for the Regional Centre for Strategic Studies (RCSS), Colombo, to recently host the SAARC Secretary General Ambassador Md. Golam Sarwar to a round table discussion on the unifying potential of SAARC and its future possibilities, besides other related issue areas.
Held on June 24th and moderated by RCSS Executive Director and former ambassador Ravinatha Aryasinha, the forum brought together a vibrant, wide ranging audience comprising academicians, diplomats, senior public servants, civil society activists and many others. Following the presentation by Ambassador Golam Sarwar titled, ‘Reigniting SAARC: Achievements, Challenges and the Way Ahead’, a lively Q&A followed.
The above forum could be described as an act of lighting the proverbial ‘candle’ rather than ‘cursing the darkness.’ It surely is a ‘darkness’ that could be seen as daunting considering that the region’s pivotal powers, India and Pakistan, are failing to act in a spirit of accord but are engaged in bitter finger-pointing on a number of questions of vital importance to SAARC.
On the other hand, what is the rest of the region doing to bring the above sides together? It is disappointing that to date the rest of SAARC has failed to launch a major diplomatic drive to bring peace between the feuding regional heavyweights. It needs to act without delay and establish its earnestness and this effort would need to prove SAARC’s staying power in the unfolding months and even years.
In assessing SAARC’s seeming failure local opinion in particular has failed to factor in what could be described as weak leadership. Since Sheikh Mujibur Rahman of Bangladesh, the founding father of SAARC, the region has failed to produce a visionary leader who could advance the SAARC cause with charisma and drive.
Among other reasons, weak leadership accounts considerably for the faltering and stuttering status, as it were, of SAARC. Badly needed are leaders who could go the extra mile, think less of narrow national interests and work diligently towards the collective well being of the region but SAARC’s millions of ordinary people have been made to wait in vain for leaders of such stature. Instead, they have been burdened with politicians who seem to be relishing the apparently moribund state of SAARC.
Looking back, it could be said that it was the dynamic leadership factor that led to the launching of the Non-Aligned Movement and for its sustenance for a few decades. True, it could be seen in some quarters that NAM is no more, but as in the case of SAARC, the former too has been unfortunate to be burdened over the years with politicians who lack the vision and drive to unflaggingly advance the fortunes of the South. NAM and SAARC lack the dynamism and vision of leaders of the stature of Jawaharlal Nehru, for example, to give them the required guidance and intellectual depth.
The reasons are complex for there not being among us currently political leaders with the vision and the steadfast commitment to advance the legitimate interests of the South. However, it could be stated with conviction that the majority of Southern leaders have too easily caved in to the demands of the global North and its financial agencies.
These leaders have failed to see, for instance, that the largely market economy oriented Northern governments would not view with favour a centrist economic model that attaches priority to the interests of the dis-empowered publics of the South. This realization ought to have dawned on the current government in Sri Lanka, for instance, some while ago but it has no choice but to abide by IMF dictates since economic survival at present is unthinkable without the latter’s succour.
Accordingly for SAARC this should be the time for some soul-searching. Priority needs to be attached to ending the feuding between India and Pakistan since at present the material fortunes of the region hinge largely on these regional giants giving peaceful relations among them a try. This is no easy challenge to meet but some daring, visionary diplomacy needs to take hold among the rest of SAARC.
There is some sense in SAARC bringing the peoples of the region together through programs that address their best collective interests. A meeting of minds among SAARC nations could enable SAARC and its agencies to build a region-wide people’s movement for progressive political and economic change that could in turn lead to the region’s political leaders sensitizing themselves more to the neglected needs of their publics.
However, the time is ‘now’ for the initiation of these progressive changes and the voice of SAARC well wishers would need to drown out those of their critics.
-
Features6 days agoPrison riots and politics: NPP’s biggest challenge and Sri Lanka’s biggest opportunity
-
Features3 days agoDirty Money
-
Editorial6 days agoMuch ado about crime: Fish or cut bait
-
Features6 days agoMore on Saudi Arabia: ARAMCO and beyond
-
News1 day agoMoney laundering case against Yoshitha, fixed for pre-trial conference
-
Sports6 days agoThe banker who rescued Sri Lankan cricket
-
Midweek Review3 days agoThe sordid tale of theft and tragedy at Finance Ministry
-
Latest News4 days agoOil prices hit 1-month high as US-Iran attacks dim Strait of Hormuz outlook

